《德法之治与齐国政权研究》出版

《德法之治与齐国政权研究》是官源海教授主持的山东省社科规划重点项目,近日由齐鲁书社出版。山东理工大学党委书记范跃进教授为之作序。     

儒家德治的实质与启示——以两汉为中心的考察

儒家\"仁政\"\"王道\"思想中有伦理道德优先、以伦理超越法律治理的含义,这是儒家思想的理想主义层面。但是在实际运行过程中,儒家伦理的贯彻实施须以各种制度为凭依,以法律治理手段为保障。董仲舒承认了法律在构建国家制度以及维系社会秩序中的作用,将儒家的价值观熔铸在各种制度与法律体系之中,将政治、制度、法律儒家化、价值化。汉武帝的\"独尊儒术\"政策实际上也是将道德治理与法律治理有机结合,这是中国古代德治与法治关系的实质。     

论政治伦理的正义主题

本文结合政治学和伦理学有关原理 ,探讨了政治伦理的主题 :正义。政治作为一种社会关系现象 ,同样是一种伦理现象 ,政治的公共权力性质决定了它以实现正义为伦理目标 ;从正义的性质及内容等方面看 ,正义根本上具有政治性 ;正义是政治道德的基本原则 ,统摄诸如自由、平等和民主等具体政治道德规范 ;政治的正义目标实现要以法治与德治的结合为保证     

道德的博弈:一种伦理学的诠释

当人们借用博弈模型来分析人类活动时,所隐喻的是博弈境遇中凸现出来的人类行为及其合作秩序出现的伦理问题.从霍布斯的傻子到休谟的农夫困境,无不体现伦理语境中对博弈问题的关注,而以协定道德来诠释合作秩序的实现,却又存在着理论上的症结.面对诚实不足和伪装难题,道德的博弈何以可能?诚实不只是作为一种合作性实践的最优策略,更是一种人们意愿践行正义的美德.     

提高对道德建设重要性的认识 坚持“法治”和“德治”并重的治国方略

通过探讨中国古代儒家“德治”的基本内容,论述了它和我们今天的社会主义的“德治”有什么不同;分析了为什么我们要强调“法治”和“德治”并重;阐释了我们今天强调“德治”的重要理论意义和现实意义。     

儒家的贤能政治及其现代困境

儒家的治国模式从根本上来讲,是一种贤能政治。所谓的"贤"是和"德"紧密联系的,主要是指人的道德品格,而"能"则是指一种治国的才干。在贤、能关系上,儒家未做严格的区分,甚至认为"德"便是一种最大的"能",因此儒家的贤能政治本质上就是"德治"。儒家的贤能政治在很长的历史时期内维持了社会的基本稳定,显示了其作为治国理念和治国方式的独特优势,然而在社会转型期的今天,其与时代发展的不适应性也越发凸显,从而我们又不得不重新审视儒家贤能政治的理论困境并思考其应对之策,进而实现其现代转化。     

政治伦理学研究的新贡献——读《现代政治视域中的"法治"与"德治"》

探寻政治生活的道德合理性与正当性,为我国社会主义政治体制改革提供理论支持,是政治伦理学研究的主旨和核心,也是当代政治伦理学工作者义不容辞的历史责任.     

德法之治:齐国政权盛衰的历史经验教训

从德法之治的角度,研究政权的兴衰,挖掘齐国统治800年的历史,其经验教训为,任人唯贤与民心向背是政权存否的关键。以人为本是富国强兵的根本。德法不举是齐国政权败亡的主要原因。     

环境的\"法治\"与\"德治\"

本文的第一部分概述了面对严峻的环境形势,我们必须动用看得见的法治(制)手段,纠正由\"市场失灵\"导致的环境问题,但这种强制性的\"他律\"亦有其缺陷;第二部分论证了环境问题为什么同时又是一个道德问题,以及环境道德的评价和绩效;第三部分强调只有配合以道德\"自律\",德法兼备,才能进行卓有成效的环境治理.     

早发达国家的政治发展次序问题

今天看来相似性的西方政治体制是经历不同的政治发展秩序漫漫演变而来的,英国和美国沿着共和-经济发展-民主政治的秩序,法国则是民主-动荡-法治的秩序,德国和日本则是人格化权威结构-经济发展-国家失败-宪政民主的秩序.因此,在政治发展的道路上,不但发展中国家面临着"艰难的抉择",早发达国家同样经历了不易的选择和演化.     

德与法有机结合--论和谐医患关系之建设

建设和谐的医患关系有赖于道德与法律的有机结合.既要发挥道德在法治建设中的作用,又要发挥法律在道德建设中的作用.在和谐的医患关系的建设中,道德与法律相互作用,但道德是统帅.     

政治伦理：“以德治国”的本体定位

德治本体问题是对“以德治国”的形而上追问,我们必须时“政治伦理”作为德治的本体定位进行探究,才能为“以德治国”提供理论资源。     

Common Law Approaches to the Relationship Between Law and Morality

How are general relations of law and morality typically conceived in an environment of Anglo-saxon common law? This paper considers some classical common law methods and traditions as these have confronted and been overlaid with modern ideas of legal positivism. While classical common law treated a community and its morality as the cultural foundation of law, legal positivism's analytical separation of law and morals, allied with liberal approaches to legal regulation, have made the relationship of legal and moral principles more complex and contested. Using ideas from Durkheim's and Weber's sociology, I argue that the traditional common law emphasis on an inductive, empirical treatment of moral practices has continuing merit, but in contemporary conditions the vague idea of community embedded in classical common law thought must be replaced with a much more precise conceptualisation of coexisting communities, whose moral bonds are diverse and require a corresponding diversity of forms of legal recognition or protection.     

借鉴韩非法治观构建和谐医患关系

近年来医院暴力愈演愈烈,医疗索赔越来越高,防御性医疗越来越明显,如何建立和谐的医患关系已成为一个亟待解决的社会问题。阐述韩非以法为治,定分止争,重刑止奸,法不阿贵和布之于百姓在医事立法与构建和谐医患关系中的借鉴作用,探讨如何通过建立法律化、规范化医患关系来缓解医患冲突,改善医患关系。     

Genealogy of Morality and Law

In order to clarify the relationship between morality and law, it is necessary to define both concepts precisely. Cultural realities refer to concepts which are more specifically defined if we focus towards the genealogy of those realities, that is to say, their motivation, function and aim. Should we start from legal anthropology, comparative law and history of law, law arises as a social technique which coactively imposes ways of solving conflicts, protecting fundamental values for a society's co-existence. Values subject to being protected are proposed by morality, the latter making subordination of law to morality inevitable. This explains that a great number of modern constitutions include a reference to fundamental moral values, that is to say, they have explicitly positivised moral contents. Legal reasoning, at all levels and expressions, needs to appeal to the aforementioned values. Constitutional reasoning, international law, legislative activity and judicial practice are studied to verify the latter. This subordination of law to morality sets out a serious problem: moralities are cultural realities which are only valid for a specific society. In order for law not to fall in a not very rational legal relativism, law should not be subordinated to morality, but to ethics, the latter understood as cross-cultural morality. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was a step forward in this sense.     

试论《淮南子》对"法"、"德"、"风俗"的糅合

在《淮南子》糅合“法”、“德”、“俗”的治道思想中,蕴涵了“反秦／袭秦”（对“法”的改良）、“倡道德／斥礼乐”（对“德”的期待）并存的内在特质,同时,还对风俗在民间社会中的教化、规范功能有着充分的认识。     

道德、宗教和文化的完整性:对跨文化伦理学及公共政策论的意义

分析传统对宗教与道德之间关系的两种模式（A）与（B）都是过分偏激容易引起误解。它们所代表的观点亦不容易在实践中可以持续。（A）模式坚持道德必须直接地依赖宗教作为它的惟一来源。（B）模式则认为道德应完全独立于宗教。然而,欧洲启蒙运动所追求的一种具普遍性和独立于宗教的理性伦却明显已经“破产”。因为并没有任何一个群体能够完全摆脱它自身拥有的历史、文化与宗教遗产。提出一个辩证法的模式,即认为宗教与文化应有一个相互依赖、相互诠释的关系,一个群体／社会的文化完整性才得以保存。这模式对跨文化伦理对话以及公共政策的讨论都具有相当的意义。     

BETWEEN EXAMPLE AND DOCTRINEContract Law and Common Morality

In Democracy and Tradition, Jeffrey Stout contends that American constitutional democracy constitutes a well‐functioning moral and political tradition that is not hostile to religion, although it does not depend on any specifically religious claims. I argue that Stout's contention is supported by a consideration of the great common law subject of contracts, as taught to first‐year law students across the United States. First, I demonstrate how contract law can fruitfully be understood as a MacIntyrean tradition. Second, I illustrate the moral richness of this tradition, and the mutually interpreting nature of rules and facts, by close attention to one particularly colorful case, Syester v. Banta. I conclude by suggesting that both religious and secular ethicists might find common law cases in general and contract law cases in particular to be a source of moral reflection that is substantively rich without being religiously divisive.     

International Law and Morality in the Theory of Secession

In order responsibly to decide whether there ought to be an international legal right of secession, I believe we need an account of the morality of secession. I propose that territorial and political societies have a moral right to secede, and on that basis I propose a regime designed to give such groups an international legal right to secede. This regime would create a procedure that could be followed by groups desiring to secede or by states desiring to resolve the issue of secession. It would give territorial political societies a legally recognized liberty to conduct a plebiscite on secession, and, assuming such a plebiscite is won by the secessionist side, a qualified right in international law to create a state without interference. Alan Buchanan has argued that proposals of this sort would create perverse incentives. I argue that there is no good reason to believe this. The point is to allow the legal regulation of secession in cases where there are active secessionist movements with legitimate moral claims, and to attempt to dampen the desire for secession in cases where secessionist sentiment is not well grounded in social and geographic reality.     

孔、孟与管子德治思想之比较

孔子和孟子是先秦儒家最重要的代表人物,他们的思想中都有着丰富的德治内容。管子虽是早期法家的代表,但思想中同样具有德治的内容。孔、孟与管子在德治思想上有着很大的相似性,在惠民爱民、正名、正身率下、以民为本、善政措施、选贤任能等方面有着诸多的一致之处。但出于各自学派的立场,孔、孟与管子在德治与法治的关系、德治的目标与特征、德治的人性论的出发点等方面也存在着差异。